1972 Libertarian nominee Hospers endorses Root for LP Chair

In these precarious times, with the future of freedom, liberty and America herself hanging in the balance by the barest of threads held in the hands of self-serving enemies and traitors of this nation – I hear the voice of hope, and that of a patriot in the person of Wayne Allyn Root.

My steady support for Mr. Root’s political positions and ambitions are reinforced each time I hear him speak or read his commentaries, editorials and writings. Root’s words ring with truth, reflecting the values of libertarianism the political philosophy, as well as the well-defined original Libertarian Party principles, of which I am proud to say I helped craft long ago.

A small central government, states’ rights, individual freedom, national security, and especially an immediate cessation of the insane spending and bankrupting of America purposefully perpetrated by the current administration. This is what Root understands better than any other candidate seeking the LP National Chair.

A prime reason I’m confident in Root as compared to others seeking the office is because Root is a consistent, telegenic presence on the airwaves – where he clearly states principles with which I strongly agree. While others profess views in the name of libertarianism that ring of anarchy and other radical positions that would be suicidal for America at this time, Root is practical in his thinking. He’s not one of those who practice ‘ostrich’ politics by sticking his head in the ground on issues involving our national security in the face of dire threats from abroad.

Root is a communicator of the right to Life, Liberty and the Pursuit of Happiness. Root’s frequent television and talk radio appearances are always on target. His website ROOT4AMERICA.com is unrivaled by any others seeking LP Chair;he is an unwavering supporter of the US Constitution, the Bill of Rights and the separation of powers; that element of checks and balances being stolen more each day by the thieves and liars who now dictate to US from Capitol Hill.

I fear the LP is running out of time. The irrational want to keep the party small so they may appear to be ‘big fish’. Between now and 2012, the LP can gain power. People want smaller government and those governing they know they can trust.

This is why I urge all right-thinking LP members to join me in giving the strongest support possible to Wayne Allyn Root, a high profile, dynamic, pragmatic voice for economic and personal freedom so desperately needed by the LP and USA..

John Hospers is Professor Emeritus, USC School of Philosophy, and the first LP candidate for United States president. Hospers also wrote the definitive book: ‘LIBERTARIANISM: A Political Philosophy for Tomorrow’

Root is practical in his thinking. He’s not one of those who practice ‘ostrich’ politics by sticking his head in the ground on issues involving our national security in the face of dire threats from abroad.

And the 1972 Presidential campaign which Hospers headed, was Pro-Defense. You might call this a return to Originalist Libertarianism, before the LP was stolen by Rothbard, Raimondo and their black arm band wearing group of AntiWar Leftist Anarchists in 1974/75.

Trent, I’m returning the favor. Gonna run a short piece on this at Libertarian Republican tomorrow, and give you a hat tip. This is especially big news for my Pro-Defense Libertarian readership. Thanks buddy.

Dr. Hospers is still an important figure in Libertarian history, even if he is a pro-war Republican now.

His endorsement will probably help more than hurt, since chances are that most LP delegates who will see the endorsement are not fully aware of Hospers’ more recent writings on political issues, I’m guessing.

And, I’m sure that Wayne is probably happy to get this endorsement for this reason, not because his foreign policy is as militaristic as Dr. Hospers’ is now – that hasn’t been the case in some time.

This was a gathering of the most active Libertarians from all over the country.

However, as with any such gathering, those who did not have to fly (or, as in my case, take a greyhound bus) in, or drive more than a day, showed up in greater numbers. They weren’t anything close to a majority of the poll, though.

Additionally, I’ve seen nothing to indicate that the Texas LP is more conservative than the national LP.

Where did Hinkle place? I’m simply shocked that he isn’t a more viable candidate. Hancock is sort of a silly candidate, I think, in light of his tactics (which seem to be fairly childish) and his belief that the Libertarian Party probably shouldn’t exist, as well as his position against voting. Root simply hasn’t been in the party long enough to take over the top administrative spot, I don’t think. Phillies makes sense, as does Hinkle. I don’t know Myers.

Paulie, correction: Hospers is a pro-war Libertarian. He’s a lifetime member of the LP. Yes, he’s backed Republicans, but he’s never left the LP.

Yes, I’m sure you are correct that he paid for a lifetime membership. I’ve read they were really cheap back in the day, and he’s not poor.

I bought one in 2000 for $1,000. As far as I know that is still what it costs now.

However, I would say that endorsing W and McCain makes someone, functionally, more of a Republican than a Libertarian.

Paulie,

Where did Hinkle place?

Dead last, and it was not close.

I’m simply shocked that he isn’t a more viable candidate.

I’m not. He did not do well in the debate, and unfortunately very few LP delegates understand the importance or details of the types of nuts and bolts competence that Hinkle emphasizes and exemplifies. A large part of the reason why the party is not more successful.

Hancock is sort of a silly candidate, I think, in light of his tactics (which seem to be fairly childish) and his belief that the Libertarian Party probably shouldn’t exist, as well as his position against voting.

That’s a position a lot of libertarians take, including quite a few who are willing to show up and take part in internal party elections.

Root simply hasn’t been in the party long enough to take over the top administrative spot, I don’t think. Phillies makes sense, as does Hinkle. I don’t know Myers.

Phillies has pissed a lot of people off over the years through his scorched earth tactics and rhetoric in constant intra-party battles. Myers, as far as I can tell, is ideologically and in terms of organizational plans similar to Phillies in many ways, but without a lot of that history — Phillies has run for chair 4 other times, and President once, without ever coming close to getting the nomination. Also, Myers seems to be a lot more friendly towards Ron Paul and shares more of his outlook on some issues, such as anti-federal reserve, than is Phillies. Phillies has a history of anti-Ron Paul statements which could make for conflict in trying to work with/reach out to/recruit CFL/YAL/Paul supporters. Both Phillies and Myers tend to see Root as too Republican-leaning, Hinkle as too tied in with the current leadership of the LNC, and Hancock as too anarchistic.

Phillies and Myers are both positioning themselves as centrists between radical/anarchists like Hancock and conservative/libertarians like Root, but Phillies has more history in party leadership struggles. On the other hand, Phillies has the New Path team, Myers does not. I expect the other New Path candidates would probably be comfortable working with Myers, though.

Hinkle is personally more radical than Phillies, but his voting history on the LNC is somewhere in the middle between radicals and moderates – whereas Phillies supports the efforts of the radicals on the committee.

Hospers was a leading light of the libertarian movement 40 years ago. His book, Libertarianism, was among the first “serious” works to discuss the libertarian philosophy and explain it to lay readers. Today, however, he represents an outpost of libertarian thinking – far to the right of 90% of active libertarians. This is partly because the mix of activists has changed (more Rothbard-style anarchists are now prominent) and partly because most libertarians now see a domestic police state as a greater threat to their lives and liberties than the “Islamofascist menace.” Hospers is still caught in the “us vs. them” thinking of the Cold War era, with “them” now being radical Muslims rather than the Communists.

Paulie @14 – That’s a pretty good overview of the five candidates, their strengths and weaknesses. Depending on whose supporters actually show up in St. Louis, the contest for LNC Chair could turn out almost any way. Right now, I’d guess that the final showdown will be Root vs. Hancock, although either could make a bad faux pas and kill his own candidacy. In terms of keeping the party unified, either Hinkle or Myers would probably be the best choice. However, this is not shaping up to be a “party unity” convention!

Hospers was never a libertarian anymore than he was ever an Objectivist. I corresponded with him for many years and found him to be a consistent Big Gov statist. The US is in no danger from abroad, the US is the danger and has been blatantly imperialistic since 1898.
9-11 only happened here because the US has been over there for 60 years backing racist Israel and rightist Arab tyrannies. Hospers bought every cold war lie by FedGov from Truman through Bush 2. Hospers bought all of
W’s big lies regarding the nonexistent threat from Iraq as well as Bush One’s lies in 1990-91.
The warfare state, not the welfare state, has been the main cause of growth in US state.
Dondero got his behind publicly whipped big time by Ron Paul after he tried to smear Paul in 08. Conservatarians like Hospers and Dondero
have zero credibility in the libertarian movement. Any candidate they endorse be sure to vote against.